MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Content-analysis of scientific and practical research areas in social pharmacy

2019· article· en· W2921313457 on OpenAlex
А. А. Kotvitska, І. О. Сурікова, І. В. Кубарєва

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent issues in pharmacy and medicine science and practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicMedical and Pharmaceutic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacyContext (archaeology)PharmacistMedicineClinical pharmacyPopulationPublic relationsPharmacy practicePolitical scienceFamily medicineMedical educationEnvironmental healthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many countries, social pharmacy, as a research area, is well developed, providing international and interdisciplinary collaboration in the context of discussing and disseminating health-related knowledge. Taking into account the European integration processes of reforming the domestic pharmaceutical sector of healthcare, it is important to study the international experience of the formation of social pharmacy as the direction of scientific research.Aim: analysis of scientific and practical areas of social pharmacy research.Materials and methods. The research of scientific publications of the International Journal “Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy” for the period of 2012–2018 has been conducted using content analysisResults. The most authoritative scientific publication that covers all aspects of social pharmacy is the scientific journal “Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy”, the editorial board of which includes scientists from The United States, Australia, The United Kingdom, Canada, Portugal, Egypt, Brazil, Northern Ireland, Finland, Kosovo, New Zealand, Estonia. It is established that, for the most part, the results of original research are published (67.7 % of all publications); in addition, the publication contains review articles, brief research, proposed models. The most widespread categories in the field of social pharmacy are community pharmacy, pharmacist, pharmaceutical service, medication adherence, communication between “pharmacists – patients – physician”, health literacy, pharmacotherapy safety, self-medication etc. Published materials cover study of most socially significant diseases (hypertension, asthma, diabetes, neurological diseases) with all categories of the population (children, adults, elderly, pregnant, rural population etc.) in the vast majority of countries of the world (North and South America, European countries, some African countries, Middle and Far East, Australia and New Zealand).Conclusions. Priority areas of social pharmacy research focus on social, organizational, economic, legal, psychological, and communication aspects that affect the effectiveness of pharmaceutical care and indicators of patient's life quality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.670
GPT teacher head0.668
Teacher spread0.002 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it